Ahead of the June primary election, the Southern California News Group compiled a list of questions to pose to the candidates who wish to represent you. You can find the full questionnaire below. Questionnaires may have been edited for spelling, grammar, length and, in some instances, to remove hate speech and offensive language.
Name: Arthur Dixon
Current job title: Community Organizer and Congressional Candidate
Age: 29
Political party affiliation: Democratic
Incumbent: No
Other political positions held: None
City where you reside: Los Angeles
Campaign website or social media: N/A
From voter ID to war powers and from immigration to tariffs, Congress has tackled many issues over the past year. What do you, though, see as the top three issues impacting Californians, and what specifically could you do as a lawmaker to address these issues? (Please answer in 250 words or less, and keep your response to future proposals.)
The biggest issues I see with Californians are housing, healthcare, and affordability.
Housing is the crisis people feel most every day. Rents are rising while wages remain the same. People are being pushed out of their communities with no clear alternatives. I would fight for large-scale public housing, federal rent stabilization, and stronger tenant protections so people aren’t one emergency away from losing everything.
The second biggest issue is the cost of living. Wages have not kept up with the rising cost of everyday life. That’s why our campaign supports a guaranteed basic income and a higher federal minimum wage. Direct monthly income from the federal government would allow people to live, not just survive.
The third issue is healthcare. Too many people avoid getting care because of cost. I recently lost my mom due to an unfair healthcare system. I support Medicare for All, so healthcare is a right, not something tied to your income or job.
These issues are all connected. When people cannot afford housing, healthcare, and basic needs, everything else falls apart. Our campaign’s focus is on real material life that makes a direct impact on people’s lives.
Speaking of voter ID, the president has implored Congress to approve legislation that would require people to show proof of citizenship in order to vote. What role do you believe the federal government plays in telling states how to conduct their own elections, as dictated by the U.S. Constitution? (Please answer in 250 words or less.)
The federal government should do everything in its power to protect the right to vote, not restrict it. Proof of citizenship requirements risk pushing out eligible voters, like working-class people, seniors, and communities of color. We should focus on expanding access, not making it harder for people.
I support making Election Day a federal holiday, automatic voter registration, and same-day registration. The federal government should do everything in its power to protect voters’ rights nationwide. In order for our democracy to be protected, people must be able to freely participate.
What, in your opinion, should the federal government focus on when it comes to immigration policy? For example, do you place a priority on border security, visas for high-skilled workers, refuge for asylum seekers, etc., and why? (Please answer in 250 words or less.)
Our nation’s immigration policy should be rooted in dignity and fairness. I support a pathway to citizenship, protection for Dreamers, and an immigration system that treats people humanely. We need to build a system that works. That means reducing visa backlogs, improving processing, and making the process more transparent.
Families should not be separated, and people should not be detained in harmful conditions. We have an obligation to build a system that is fair and humane.
It’s been over a year since Gov. Gavin Newsom asked the federal government for supplemental disaster aid to help Southern California communities rebuild after the devastating Palisades and Eaton wildfires, but neither President Donald Trump nor Congress has acted. What would you do to push for the funding, besides writing letters to the Trump administration or the leaders of Congress? (Please answer in 250 words or less.)
I would use the leverage Congress actually has. That means pushing disaster funding through budget negotiations and building coalitions with other members whose districts face similar disasters. Funding should not depend on political timing.
I also support automatic disaster relief triggers so communities are not waiting months or years after devastation. Beyond recovery, we need prevention. That includes investing in climate resilience, infrastructure, and emergency response so communities are better prepared going forward.
Do you support a ban or restriction on congressional lawmakers and their families from buying or selling individual stocks? Why or why not? And what would you propose to ensure lawmakers aren’t using their positions to engage in insider trading? (Please answer in 250 words or less.)
Yes. Members of Congress and their families should not be trading individual stocks. There is a clear conflict of interest when lawmakers can influence industries and personally profit from those decisions.
I support requiring assets to be placed in blind trusts or limited to diversified funds, along with strict enforcement and real penalties for violations. Public office should be about serving people, not building personal wealth.
Do you support stronger regulations on pollution and carbon emissions? If so, how would you ensure those regulations aren’t overly burdensome on small businesses or lower-income families? And if not, how do you propose lawmakers protect the environment and curtail the impacts of climate change? (Please answer in 250 words or less.)
Yes, we need stronger action on climate. California is already feeling the impacts through fires, heat, and air quality. We need to transition to clean energy, reduce emissions, and invest in sustainable infrastructure.
To make sure this does not fall on working people, climate policy must include green union jobs, lower energy costs, and investment in public transit and housing. Climate action should improve people’s lives, not make them harder.
President Donald Trump has significantly increased spending for the U.S. Department of Defense. Would you, as a member of Congress, approve additional dollars for the military if the president were to ask for more funding? How would you ensure that any military spending does not end up putting the American people or national security in harm’s way? (Please answer in 250 words or less.)
No, I would not support increasing military spending. We already spend more on the military than the next several countries combined, while people in my district cannot afford rent or healthcare. That is a failure of priorities. The military industrial complex profits from endless conflict. I will not support pouring more money into systems that benefit contractors while neglecting people at home.
I support cutting excessive military spending and reinvesting in housing, healthcare, and economic stability. Real security starts with stable communities, not a larger defense budget. We should lead with diplomacy and de-escalation, not constant expansion of military power.
Under what specific circumstances do you believe the U.S. should engage in a war? (Please answer in 250 words or less.)
War should be a last resort, and in most cases, avoided entirely. The U.S. has been involved in too many wars that have cost lives and destabilized entire regions. We need to break from that pattern.
Force should only be used in direct self-defense against a clear and immediate threat that cannot be resolved through diplomacy. Even then, it must be limited and focused on protecting life. I believe in a foreign policy centered on diplomacy, human rights, and ending support for actions that harm civilians. We should be a force for peace, not endless war.
Do you believe a president should seek congressional approval before engaging in military action overseas? Why, or why not? (Please answer in 250 words or less.)
Yes, the president should be required to seek congressional approval before engaging in military action overseas. The Constitution gives Congress the power to declare war for a reason. It is meant to prevent one person from making decisions that can cost lives and destabilize entire regions.
Too often, that responsibility has been bypassed. That weakens accountability and allows conflicts to expand without real public debate. If we are sending people into harm’s way, there must be a clear vote and responsibility shared by elected representatives.
Congress, in theory, is supposed to serve as a check on the president through budgetary, legislative and oversight powers. Do you believe Congress has fulfilled that obligation during the past two administrations, with one being a Democrat and the other a Republican? Why or why not? (Please answer in 250 words or less.)
No, Congress has not consistently fulfilled its role as a check on the president. Across both Democratic and Republican administrations, there has been too much willingness to defer on issues like war powers and spending.
That failure has allowed executive power to grow while accountability has weakened. Congress needs to take its responsibility seriously by exercising oversight, challenging decisions when necessary, and representing the interests of the public, not political convenience.
Governments around the world are increasingly considering an age ban or other restrictions on social media use among young people, citing mental health and other concerns. Should Congress adopt such restrictions? If so, what specific restrictions do you propose? (Please answer in 250 words or less.)
I do not support broad bans on social media for young people. Restrictions alone will not solve the problem and can create new issues around access and expression.
Instead, Congress should regulate the platforms themselves. That means stronger data privacy protections, limits on addictive design features, and more transparency in how algorithms shape what people see. The focus should be on making platforms safer, not simply restricting users.
Statistically, violent crime rates in California are on the decline, yet residents still don’t feel safe or at ease in their communities. How do you see your role in Congress in addressing the underlying issues that make Californians feel unsafe in their own neighborhoods? (Please answer in 250 words or less.)
People do not feel safe when their basic needs are not being met. Housing instability, poverty, and lack of access to mental health care all contribute to that feeling, even when crime rates are declining.
My role in Congress would be to address those root causes. That means investing in housing, healthcare, and community-based programs so people have stability. Real safety comes from strong, supported communities, not just enforcement.
There are term limits to serve in the California Legislature, but none to serve in Congress. Would you advocate for term limits for House members? Why or why not? If you support term limits, how many years maximum should a House member be allowed to serve? (Please answer in 250 words or less.)
Yes, I support term limits for members of Congress. Long periods in office can lead to concentration of power and a disconnect from the people they represent.
I would support a limit of around 12 years in the House. That allows enough time to gain experience while still ensuring new leadership and accountability over time.
What’s a hidden talent you have? (Please answer in 250 words or less.)
I have a strong ability to connect with people from different backgrounds and make complex issues feel clear and real. That helps me communicate ideas in a way that actually reaches people, not just talks at them.
Whether it is speaking, writing, or video, I focus on being direct and honest so people feel understood and included in the conversation.